LOL. _ _ _ _ _ _
"There is a good chance the answer is "no"! The SEC investigations are commonly done in the "dark", prior to communicating with the potential "offender"! If the FBI gets involved, it is entirely possible the "offender" would know nothing until the FBI actually issues a subpoena and confiscates the "offender's" records. This does not usually happen until the agency has a reasonable idea that a crime has probably occurred."
My thoughts on reading this detailed insight into FBI and SEC procedure:
1) It is good to know that the SEC does not contact the potential offender as a first step to their investigation. Solid info.
2) I am a little confused by the statement: "it is entirely possible the "offender" would know nothing until the FBI actually issues a subpoena and confiscates the "offender's" records." What kind of records would they be issuing a subpoena for that would lead them to not having an idea?
3) And you kind of ... lol ... lost me at, "This does not usually happen until the agency has a reasonable idea that a crime has probably occurred." I have never heard of a "reasonable idea" standard in this capacity. Maybe it's in a FBI/SEC handbook? Or possibly relates to a constitutional Criminal procedure (right) case-law "thingy?" Like reasonable suspicion being required for a "Stop" as opposed to "probable cause" for an arrest or seizure? But ... no ... wait, maybe that's beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction. All so confusing these important little details. Perhaps you could offer further guidance?
I am looking forward to more DD of this caliber, no matter "where" or on what stock board it might be found.
